Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 168 U.S. 437 - The Resolute

The Resolute’s Empirical Analysis

168 U.S. 437 · 1897

Citation profile

181
cited by 181 later decisions
13
cited 13 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

63 federal appellate · 20 district · 15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 181 later decisions (13 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2019 · most notably Continental Grain Company v. The Fbl-585 (1960), Madruga v. Superior Court of State of California in and for San Diego County (1954)

63 federal appellate · 20 district · 15 state decisions

2901897190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Kneeland v. American Loan & Trust Co. · Ex Parte Cooper · Fassett · Schunk v. Moline, Milburn & Stoddart Co.

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 181 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Jurisdiction .... [a]s applied to a suit in rem for the breach of a maritime contract ... presupposes-First, that the contract sued upon is a maritime contract; and, second, that the property proceeded against is within the lawful custody of the court.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T]he question of lien or no lien is not one of jurisdiction, but of merits.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““Did the order direct these vessels to be sold free of maritime liens or subject to them, or was it silent in this particular? Were the lienholders upon these vessels paid from the purchase money according to their relative rank as they would have been had the sale been conducted by a court of admiralty? If they were, that would amount to very strong, if not conclusive, evidence against the subsequent endeavor to enforce the liens in a court of admiralty.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.